Search for: "Bounds v. State" Results 7561 - 7580 of 9,710
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Aug 2017, 7:31 am by Lev Martyniuk
In Delaware, this question was raised and answered last year in Obeid v. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 7:31 am by Lev Martyniuk
In Delaware, this question was raised and answered last year in Obeid v. [read post]
1 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court currently has on its docket various cases pitting one or more states against the federal government, such as Pennsylvania v. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 6:12 am by Joel R. Brandes
Indeed, "[t]he essence of equity jurisdiction has been the power ... to [mold] each decree to the necessities of the particular case" (State of New York v. [read post]
11 Jun 2018, 5:00 am by Cori Crider
To move me, they bound me to a stretcher from head to toe, like a mummy. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 1:04 pm by Howard Knopf
The latest is the landmark ruling by Justice Aylen of the Federal Court in Province of Alberta et al v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 6:30 pm by Jane Bambauer
A more significant free speech victory for Big Pharma was delivered by the Second Circuit in United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2011, 9:19 am by Eugene Volokh
In its order, in identifying the parameters it utilized to resolve the parents’ school placement dispute, the trial court stated that “education is by its nature an exploration and examination of new things,” and that “a child requires academic, social, cultural, and physical interaction with a variety of experiences, people, concepts, and surroundings in order to grow to an adult who can make intelligent decisions about how to achieve a productive and satisfying… [read post]
1 May 2019, 7:51 am
Supreme Court on the basis that US courts lacked jurisdiction in that case (case opinion here: Kiobel v. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 10:00 am by Richard A. Epstein
If genuine ambiguity remains, the agency’s reading must still fall “within the bounds of reasonable interpretation [citing Arlington v. [read post]
1 Jan 2017, 8:58 pm by David Cheifetz
Clements a second kick at the financial can, the SCC majority either chose to ignore this point or overlooked it. ** If you care, this is the text of Fox v Danis at para. 26: [26] The trial judge was not bound to either accept the doctor’s evidence in its entirety, including his conclusion, or dismiss it completely; she was entitled to “accept parts of the testimony, reject other parts of it and make appropriate findings”: R. v. [read post]
1 May 2015, 6:44 pm by Stephen Bilkis
A New York Family Lawyer said the court records establish that on May 6, 2003, the court adjudicated the Child V. [read post]